Thoughts on the season

[Patrirish]

Very good season, but I remain puzzled by the blowouts.

Michigan, Miami, Clemson, Alabama.

I know it can happen to any team, but the repetitiveness bothers and puzzles me.

 

[Golson5]

Very good season, but I remain puzzled by the blowouts.

Michigan, Miami, Clemson, Alabama.

I know it can happen to any team, but the repetitiveness bothers and puzzles me.

Theres no reason to be puzzled by the blowouts to Alabama and Clemson.

 

[wetwater]

Theres no reason to be puzzled by the blowouts to Alabama and Clemson.

I agree with this take but I would also add the Michigan's and Miami's in there as well.

Notre Dame occasionally blows out a Miami or a Michigan themselves. this is just what happens over the course of a large number of games they are not always going to be one possessiin games regardless of how closely matched the teams are.

Notre Dame is not doing anything shocking or surprising or weird or unorthodox in their performance. They are simply performing about how you would expect a team right where they are ranked to perform.

They basically have a really low percentage chance of beating anybody at the top ranked significantly higher than them, they have a really high percentage chance of beating teams rated significantly below them and they're going to win about half of their games against teams that are ranked close to them (some of those games will be close, some will be blowouts).at the end of the day Notre Dame is a 10 to 15 rated football program somewhere in the second to third tier who recruits third-tier talent that produces about what you would expect a team with their peripherals to perform.

Edit: sorry for the terrible grammar I'm on my phone using voice transcription and it's a buggy mess on this platform

 

[Golson5]

I agree with this take but I would also add the Michigan's and Miami's in there as well.

Notre Dame occasionally blows out a Miami or a Michigan themselves. this is just what happens over the course of a large number of games they are not always going to be one possessiin games regardless of how closely matched the teams are.

Notre Dame is not doing anything shocking or surprising or weird or unorthodox in their performance. They are simply performing about how you would expect a team right where they are ranked to perform.

They basically have a really low percentage chance of beating anybody at the top ranked significantly higher than them, they have a really high percentage chance of beating teams rated significantly below them and they're going to win about half of their games against teams that are ranked close to them (some of those games will be close, some will be blowouts).at the end of the day Notre Dame is a 10 to 15 rated football program somewhere in the second to third tier who recruits third-tier talent that produces about what you would expect a team with their peripherals to perform.

Edit: sorry for the terrible grammar I'm on my phone using voice transcription and it's a buggy mess on this platform

I totally understood the Alabama and Clemson blowouts.

We are a better program than Miami right now. That should not have happened. We are equal or a little better program than Michigan. That should not have happened

 

[tbonesays]

I used to get these same rhetorical questions when I was beating the "recruiting" drum back before they became the conventional wisdom it is now.

We could basically replace F/+ with "recruiting rankings" in this post and it would be nearly identical. Funny that none of those people are singing the same tune with the benefit of hindsight now.

On my chaseball account I recently did a post, posting all of the final F/+ rankings of the competition on the schedule.

After you take out the top 5 teams, the bottom 8 teams had an aggregate ranking of 78th out of 130. There are only 65 "power 5" teams in college football. Basically there were 8 teams on the schedule that would lose a ton of games to G5 competition several of which would be mediocre FCS teams (Bowling Green & New Mexico).

Games vs Virginia Tech were way too competitive. Virginia Tech was ranked 50th+ in F/+. The games vs louisville were back and forth and competitive for several quarters (ND clinging on to 2 possession lead through 3 quarters in that game before finally putting them away with a third score). Louisville finished somewhere in the 40s-50s in F/+.

Clemson's games outside of their near loss to North Carolina were all the equivalent to how ND beat up on New Mexico and Bowling Green. Basically no contest after the 2nd quarter with their 2nd and 3rd teamers in for the majority of the 2nd half.

ND was in way too many competitive games vs way too many bad teams which drove their F/+ ranking down on top of their convincing losses to Georgia and Michigan. They were also on the receiving end of a lot of turnover luck with a hugely disproportionate turnover differential relative to the rest of the league.

edit i had it backwards: virginia & virginia tech were ranked in the mid 40s ... it was Louisville that finished ranked 60.

These teams all got to beat up on poor ACC competition so their record looks much better than the actual quality of their teams/performance this season.

The problem with this an

I hope that my posts convey that ND is not only not the popular dominant team at the moment, they are REALLY FAR AWAY from that tier, like not even close. Like the distance from ND and the handful of favorites for playoff spots is the equivalent between Notre Dame and some team ranked on the bubble of 25th.

A team/program on the cusp of that Alabama/Clemson/OSU/LSU tier would be Georgia, Oklahoma, or maybe even a Penn State in 2019.

It's only true because the top 3 are really better than #4 to 20, the latter of which aren't that far apart. And you're vastly underrating our schedule which was about 15th before the bowls ahead of most of the top 10. their SOS went up obviously because they got to play each other instead of Iowa State in the bowls. I've never seen anyone compare the bottom 8 teams in a schedule before so I have no idea where we'd rank. I suppose with the ACC being we have an easier week to week than some, but we also play 9 P5s and top 15 Navy.

Likewise no one is really saying we should be #5 but I am saying we're a fringe top 10 team, not 15th. In the final week we were rated lower in the polls than in every BCS computer.

And since the rest of the top 25 teams are close it is hardly a knock to say we played a bunch of competitive games when Penn St et al played a bunch of competitive games. Actually #4 OU played a few as well. It's only relevant against someone who thinks ND is about equal with Clemson. And our vaguely #10-#15 recruiting rankings are roughly on par with our power.

So that's why I call this season orderly because everything lines up EXCEPT our poll ranking will likely be a few spots below the computers. But that is understandable as computers don't feel revulsion at how BK
takes 1 dump on the big stage each yr.

 

[francade]

“ND dominated VT and the game was only close due to bad luck and a few bad plays by Book”

The fumble retuned for a TD was as bad as any “bad play” by book. The pick he threw to holifield was the only really “bad play” of the 1st half from book. Should’ve dropped 21 on bud foster in the first half even w/ the pick. The narrative that book was bad until the end of the game is 100% made up horseshit.

 

[echowaker]

A new screen name for Chase?

Yep resurrected from the cornfield. very Lazarus like....

 

[echowaker]

Solid season 11-2, and end up barely outside the Top 10. But the missed opportunity at UGA, and the no show at 9-4 Michigan was a real disappointment.

LSU
Clemson
Ohio State

Were simply the cream of the crop and everyone else was a distant 4th.

ND could have played and beaten all the other teams that were in contention for that last playoff spot on a neutral field IMO

UGA
OU
Oregon
Alabama
Baylor
Utah

i agree.

 

[echowaker]

“ND dominated VT and the game was only close due to bad luck and a few bad plays by Book”

The fumble retuned for a TD was as bad as any “bad play” by book. The pick he threw to holifield was the only really “bad play” of the 1st half from book. Should’ve dropped 21 on bud foster in the first half even w/ the pick. The narrative that book was bad until the end of the game is 100% made up horseshit.

he was pretty awful in my opinion for the first 57 minutes.

 

[Rionegro]

I record all the games every year. After the season, I review them quickly.

The defense was impressive; but I surprised by how poorly our defensive backs (except Hamilton) often played even with our excellent pass rush. For what it's worth, I think we got away with a ton of pass interference and defensive holding all year long.

For the life of me, I can't figure out our offense and haven't been able to for most of Kelly's time at ND. Usually, it seems we can score bunches of points, but our offense just seems random and scattershot to me. What you see week one is pretty much what you see week 10.

There were a lot of complaints about the offensive line, but I thought by and large they did well in pass protection. However, the run blocking leaves much to be desired. It seems what our offensive linemen do best is run over to the running back or quarterback who has just been plastered and help him off the ground.

This was a good team, hardly a great team. We are going to miss Gilman and Claypool in a big way next year.

Interesting take on the PI and holding non calls. Nobody on the board wanted to hear it but I had similar thoughts. The jersey grabbing was so constant I’m convinced the guys are taught this.

 

[tbonesays]

Interesting take on the PI and holding non calls. Nobody on the board wanted to hear it but I had similar thoughts. The jersey grabbing was so constant I’m convinced the guys are taught this.

There's probably an ebb and flow on how strictly PI gets enforced.

 

[francade]

“he was pretty awful in my opinion for the first 57 minutes.”

echo, not being a wiseass but please watch it again, and if you still think he stunk for 57 minutes, we’ll agree to disagree.